Forum Structure Revision

I would just quote Kari here but my phone doesn't like that :(

I think the IJCC should continue to have it's own separate subforum given that it's the IJCC headquarters and not just an ERN things. It's a multi-regional thing :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dax
Rachael said:
I would just quote Kari here but my phone doesn't like that :(

I think the IJCC should continue to have it's own separate subforum given that it's the IJCC headquarters and not just an ERN things. It's a multi-regional thing :)
Click to expand...
it's also not a Cabinet office. as such it should either be pushed into the Octagon as it is a primarily military function OR be put into 17 Dove as an embassy.
 
Kari said:
it's also not a Cabinet office. as such it should either be pushed into the Octagon as it is a primarily military function OR be put into 17 Dove as an embassy.
Click to expand...

I think putting it into 17 Dove as an embassy makes more sense than putting it in the Octagon.
 
It's not an embassy either, though.
 
Comrade Prim said:
We've had two of our most recent newcomers both state that they have had issues with the layout of the forum and finding things. Seems to be at least a bit of a problem.
Click to expand...
Except we've had newcomers tell us that through every iteration and layout of our forums for a decade plus. And often when we've surveyed players, they've given us conflicting input about layout and possible changes. I find the "newcomers" argument pretty weak.

I also don't love ditching the names with historical value that are part of our regional identity, and nesting forums 3 or 4 layers deep might give the appearance of more active forums but could easily mask that the activity is artificial and misleading to anyone examining what is and isn't active/of value.
 
Lethen said:
Except we've had newcomers tell us that through every iteration and layout of our forums for a decade plus. And often when we've surveyed players, they've given us conflicting input about layout and possible changes. I find the "newcomers" argument pretty weak.

I also don't love ditching the names with historical value that are part of our regional identity, and nesting forums 3 or 4 layers deep might give the appearance of more active forums but could easily mask that the activity is artificial and misleading to anyone examining what is and isn't active/of value.
Click to expand...

I do think there's a difference between today and 5 years ago. Smartphones are ubiquitous in a way they weren't 5 or 10 years ago. People play NS differently. Rather than sitting down at a computer after school and looking through all the unread posts on a forum, many people (myself included) check in throughout the day on Discord and the forums (I check the forums more often now because Xenforo is mobile friendly while ZB was not). I look at the active topics. I rarely browse through the main page forums unless I'm looking for something specific.

For a new member, I can understand why some things are confusing or daunting. We have a long list of main page forums. There are three different main page forums for the Navy. The embassies are in a different location than the application for an embassy. Things that should intuitively be together are not. For those of us who have been looking at this forum for a decade, it doesn't matter. I can find anything. Sort of like I can find anything on my desk at work even though it's a huge mess.

I don't think we harm anyone by making some changes, and if it does good for some people, then it's worthwhile.

@Darcness I'm content to leave the ministry forums where they are if that's what people prefer, but I'm not sure that consolidating them under one main forum and moving them next to the Goldenblock, Senate, etc, makes them less important. I personally liked it when all the applications were in the same area, and this way they could all be in the same area without being in a separate location (like they were when they were in the CSO). Ministers could even use that main forum for announcements if they wanted.
 
I'm fine with consolidating and moving some main page forums into second-level/nested forums, but I have a few sticking points:

(1) Things should be intuitive and make sense for placement;
(2) Some parts of the Cultural Hub should be merged, but we need to seriously examine their purpose (e.g. I don't think many of those subfora are *meant* to be active all the time but provide a value none-the-less);
(3) We keep names of historical and cultural importance that are intrinsically Europeian.
 
Beyond making the front page looks less formidable what does this actually accomplish? If we nestle everything in one subform or another I suspect it will be harder, not easier, for new members to find and join ministrys/the navy. It also dosent seem to make navigation any simpler. It just replaces scrolling down a page with a bunch of clicks. I fail to understand why the current system is difficult.
 
Amalgamating a lot of the sub-forums that serve near identical function (particularly in the RLD) would add a lot of clarity.
 
Don't think we forgot about this, btw, guys. Hopefully we'll re-focus on this once the referendum has been settled.
 
*bump*
*poke*
*cage rattle*
 
Sopo said:
1) Move all ministries barring the Navy under one main-page parent forum that would hold all applications.
2) Move the ERN HQ under the Octagon, possibly moving Navy sign-ups to the Octagon.
Click to expand...

That would work.

3) Move all political parties and societies under one parent forum with a stickied link to the party/society application and perhaps also party membership applications.
Click to expand...

The first part makes sense. I presume that private forums will still exist? I don't see why the stickied link would be necessary in that parent forum. Probably the parent forum would be best served by being empty.

4) Move the Republic Square to the Europeian Station. Delete the Cultural Hub and move subforums (after pruning unused ones) under the Republic Square.
Click to expand...
I'd tend to disagree. I'd like to see that near the bottom still, after all governmental stuff. Deleting the cultural hub makes sense though. Maybe a new section with only TRS?

5) Rename the Red Light District to a name appropriate for housing only the EBC and Letho-Monarchy Media Center (maybe also the new Parties/Societies main forum)
Click to expand...

Good.

6) Combine the Office of Diplomatic and Foreign Relations into 17 Dove's Swoop Lane (embassy forum), potentially with a more practical name.
Click to expand...

Tend to disagree. This is presumably a gateway for people to get diplomatic visas. Keeping that near the top makes more sense.

7) Consolidation of university and pine-euro library (archives) with potential renaming to better clarify their purposes.
Click to expand...

The university needs some rethinking imo anyway ...
 
Bumping this for more input as I'd like to actually start implementing some of this stuff.
 
I'm going to work on this over the long weekend. We're going to be overhauling forum permissions, and a new plan for the forum structure goes hand in hand with that. If you have input on the proposed changes in this thread, please give it.

I will also be archiving some things like the IJCC and the Regional Service Center which will make a difference as well.
 
Would this be the right time to ask about Archive access?
 
Le Libertie said:
Would this be the right time to ask about Archive access?
Click to expand...
Darc is working on it. Essentially, the issue is a vast and complex permissions problem that to fix manually would take a very, very long time.
 
Sopo said:
Darc is working on it. Essentially, the issue is a vast and complex permissions problem that to fix manually would take a very, very long time.
Click to expand...
Just re. the archives; This can be worked around regarding historical court and legislative documents fairly easily by using the old Zeta/Tapa forums. Not sure if it would be worth allowing selected access to the more sensitive documents by remasking people over there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top